Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 286 SW 607 - Wright v. Maddox

Wright v. Maddox’s Empirical Analysis

1926

Citation profile

18
cited by 18 later decisions
1
states following
July 1942
most recently cited

18 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently July 1942

18 state decisions

100192619301940decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on Roberson v. Hughes · 27 Tex. Civ. App. 481 - Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. Middleton · Shanks v. Carroll · 45 Tex. Civ. App. 192 - J. M. Guffey Petroleum Co. v. Nearn · Texas Land Co. v. Williams

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““We do not understand the construction appellant’s counsel has placed upon this rule in drawing what he denominates ‘points.’ Each of these.‘points’ is a mere reference to the assignment of error to which the subjoined proposition or propositions relate. This reference, while held by some of the courts of civil appeals not to be mandatory, is helpful, and therefore proper, and the rule should be amended so as-to require it, but to call the reference itself a point within the meaning of rule 30 is manifestly a misnomer.” .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““ ‘In each proposition should he propounded or afiirmed some matter or thing done or refused to be done in the court below, embraced in the appropriate assignment of error, for which the judgment should be reversed, or sustained.’ ” /”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““A proposition or point as used in this rule means a distinct ground of reversal as applied to the particular case in review, and as raised by one or more assignments of error.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.